Cricket-Match-Special ... A forum for discussion

alfie wrote:Sympathy for Kohli , whose efforts didn't deserve to see him on the losing side. I would have had him as MoTM , brilliant as young Curran's match turning performance was.
But with his all round influence - and the tradition of awarding it to someone on the winning team - you can see why it went where it did.

If his teammates can back him up next match , India will have a great chance to fight back at Lord's ...England will miss Stokes !

This may go on to be a very interesting series.

What happened to Ben? How many tests will he miss. Took Virat's wicket I will be very excited if he misses remaining whole series.

Adi wrote:

alfie wrote:Sympathy for Kohli , whose efforts didn't deserve to see him on the losing side. I would have had him as MoTM , brilliant as young Curran's match turning performance was.
But with his all round influence - and the tradition of awarding it to someone on the winning team - you can see why it went where it did.

If his teammates can back him up next match , India will have a great chance to fight back at Lord's ...England will miss Stokes !

This may go on to be a very interesting series.

What happened to Ben? How many tests will he miss. Took Virat's wicket I will be very excited if he misses remaining whole series.

His court case starts Monday and is apparently likely to last between 5-7 days. Should just miss the second test.

captaincolly wrote:

Adi wrote:

alfie wrote:Sympathy for Kohli , whose efforts didn't deserve to see him on the losing side. I would have had him as MoTM , brilliant as young Curran's match turning performance was.
But with his all round influence - and the tradition of awarding it to someone on the winning team - you can see why it went where it did.

If his teammates can back him up next match , India will have a great chance to fight back at Lord's ...England will miss Stokes !

This may go on to be a very interesting series.

What happened to Ben? How many tests will he miss. Took Virat's wicket I will be very excited if he misses remaining whole series.

His court case starts Monday and is apparently likely to last between 5-7 days. Should just miss the second test.

Thank you. I hope the hearing gets adjourned few more times until this series ends.

alfie wrote:

sussexpob wrote:If I were kohli I'd be demanding an explanation of the Sharma wicket. Makes no sense at all.

Hardly. Clear space between bat and ball - on my TV anyway

And that little "tremor" didn't look like an edge to me...nor , obviously , to the third umpire. Lot of little noises happen around the batsman. I'm satisfied the correct decision was made - and I didn't detect any shock or outrage from the Indian camp over it.

I'd refer anyone who is interested (nobody) to the discussion I had with delta alpha years ago about snicko on the drs mandatory thread, page 18. It's not interesting, but technically explains how sound engineering works.

It's very unlikely, verging on impossible, that a sound be filtered to block out ambient sounds and you get incidental sounds coming through. The bat doesn't hit the pad as the tremor registers, it does so as the ball pass the edge.

If an incidental sounds pass through the filter, to register it is likely to have to have been such a large sound in the same frequency ranges as an edge sound.

I said to delpha alpha years ago, people get confused about sounds and shapes of waves they recognise, but it's totally wrong to do that.

If the ball is next to the bat and a clear sound registers, it doesn't matter how big or if it's the expected shape, you are 99.9 percent sure it's bat on ball.

The shape of the oscillation can and is always manipulated. It's changed by all around it.

He's either hit it, or snicko is compromised. They are literally the only two conclusions.

Adi wrote:

captaincolly wrote:

Adi wrote:

alfie wrote:Sympathy for Kohli , whose efforts didn't deserve to see him on the losing side. I would have had him as MoTM , brilliant as young Curran's match turning performance was.
But with his all round influence - and the tradition of awarding it to someone on the winning team - you can see why it went where it did.

If his teammates can back him up next match , India will have a great chance to fight back at Lord's ...England will miss Stokes !

This may go on to be a very interesting series.

What happened to Ben? How many tests will he miss. Took Virat's wicket I will be very excited if he misses remaining whole series.

His court case starts Monday and is apparently likely to last between 5-7 days. Should just miss the second test.

Thank you. I hope the hearing gets adjourned few more times until this series ends.

There was an article on cricinfo saying if there is an adjournment he'll probably play the second test. I don't know anything about these cases but the suggestion was that adjournment is highly unlikely.

captaincolly wrote:

Adi wrote:

captaincolly wrote:

Adi wrote:

alfie wrote:Sympathy for Kohli , whose efforts didn't deserve to see him on the losing side. I would have had him as MoTM , brilliant as young Curran's match turning performance was.
But with his all round influence - and the tradition of awarding it to someone on the winning team - you can see why it went where it did.

If his teammates can back him up next match , India will have a great chance to fight back at Lord's ...England will miss Stokes !

This may go on to be a very interesting series.

What happened to Ben? How many tests will he miss. Took Virat's wicket I will be very excited if he misses remaining whole series.

His court case starts Monday and is apparently likely to last between 5-7 days. Should just miss the second test.

Thank you. I hope the hearing gets adjourned few more times until this series ends.

There was an article on cricinfo saying if there is an adjournment he'll probably play the second test. I don't know anything about these cases but the suggestion was that adjournment is highly unlikely.

With Sam Curran giving such performance it will give some peace of mind to Joe Root. Otherwise Ben's absence could have been a major issue. Actually the way he bowled was very surprising. He looked very ordinary when I watched his bowling in May. But he is taking key wickets now. Obviously the major difference is the conditions.

Unless my tv is broken there is a visible gap between the bat and the ball

You can even see off stump in the gap between ball and bat

looked good to me too, on higlights

I didn't realise there was any controversy, or I wouldn't have deleted my recording of the highlights

None of the commentary I've read suggests there is any controversy about that wicket whatsoever. There is daylight between bat and ball on the replay and nothing on hotspot.

sussexpob wrote:

alfie wrote:

sussexpob wrote:If I were kohli I'd be demanding an explanation of the Sharma wicket. Makes no sense at all.

Hardly. Clear space between bat and ball - on my TV anyway

And that little "tremor" didn't look like an edge to me...nor , obviously , to the third umpire. Lot of little noises happen around the batsman. I'm satisfied the correct decision was made - and I didn't detect any shock or outrage from the Indian camp over it.

I'd refer anyone who is interested (nobody) to the discussion I had with delta alpha years ago about snicko on the drs mandatory thread, page 18. It's not interesting, but technically explains how sound engineering works.

It's very unlikely, verging on impossible, that a sound be filtered to block out ambient sounds and you get incidental sounds coming through. The bat doesn't hit the pad as the tremor registers, it does so as the ball pass the edge.

If an incidental sounds pass through the filter, to register it is likely to have to have been such a large sound in the same frequency ranges as an edge sound.

I said to delpha alpha years ago, people get confused about sounds and shapes of waves they recognise, but it's totally wrong to do that.

If the ball is next to the bat and a clear sound registers, it doesn't matter how big or if it's the expected shape, you are 99.9 percent sure it's bat on ball.

The shape of the oscillation can and is always manipulated. It's changed by all around it.

He's either hit it, or snicko is compromised. They are literally the only two conclusions.

Well in fact I remember reading that discussion at the time (and just reread it) Contrary to your comment , Sussex , I did find it quite interesting - though I have to confess I wasn't quite able to understand all the finer details !
Obviously I'm not silly enough to try and argue with you on something that is not my field ; but I do note that you use words such as "unlikely" and " 99.9%" ...which point to a lack of total certainty , do they not ? And unless I am mistaken , you have not actually been involved in the design or operation of the snicko device that is used in the drs system.

I do not know what extraneous sounds manage to infiltrate the system ; but I am fairly sure I have at times seen small unexplained marks on the snicko visual that are quite clearly nothing to do with the bat. In the case at hand - I haven't yet viewed it back - I had assumed any extra sound was a case of bat on pad , bat on boot ; as many have said it seemed the ball was nowhere near the edge of the bat,

Look I may be wrong - not claiming omniscience - but the total lack of any surprise on the part of the batsman I think also supports my contention that there was no edge...as does the fact that no one apart from yourself seems to think here was anything controversial about the decision.

Hey maybe snicko is indeed "compromised" ? I don't know ; but I certainly don't believe there was clear and obvious grounds to overturn the onfield decision of out...

My simple take on the dismissal.... I am sure that there is no controversy regarding any of Indian dismissal. Else there would have been chaos in Indian fans right now, especially the decision being against us. The chaos right now is about our batsmen apart from Virat Kohli in these batting conditions.

Here it is

bigfluffylemon wrote:None of the commentary I've read suggests there is any controversy about that wicket whatsoever. There is daylight between bat and ball on the replay and nothing on hotspot.

Hotspot isnt being used in the series, is it? Think India dont agree to use it in last few years. Certainly over 3.5 days, I never once saw Sky use it (or I have gone mad). Certainly wasnt used by the umpire.

Is there daylight in the picture below?

sussexpob wrote:

bigfluffylemon wrote:None of the commentary I've read suggests there is any controversy about that wicket whatsoever. There is daylight between bat and ball on the replay and nothing on hotspot.

Hotspot isnt being used in the series, is it? Think India dont agree to use it in last few years. Certainly over 3.5 days, I never once saw Sky use it (or I have gone mad). Certainly wasnt used by the umpire.

Is there daylight in the picture below?

I think there is. Not a lot of it ; but any is enough...

Obviously you see this differently from the rest of us so I think we'd best agree to disagree...